@BitcoinErrorLog
63333 stacked

Interoperability in this context is a red herring. Specs and protocols compete, and eventually there is capitulation to the winner that gets the most support and thus most tools, in the most coding languages, for the most OS's, with the most end users, skin in the game, etc.

Interoperability is not easy even when you cooperate. People use different languages to program in on both the base/native level, and then in implementations at app level, and then syncing over protocol/specs is another issue.

Even LN implementations are not fully interop.

Interoperability just means people using the same thing, but these are all different things (Slashtags, Web5, nostr) despite them solving some overlapping use cases. So what is really needed is some combination of migration, resolvers, aliasing, conversion, support for multiple formats in clients, etc, etc.

You probably won't see much of that at this stage. This is not to say that Synonym is closed-minded or stubborn, so much as all of our teams have to manage our priorities. Synonym has actively researched, contacted, and collaborated as often as possible, but this environment, so far is honestly one of the more hostile and collaboration-disinterested I have encountered. Very competitive.

I personally think managing keys across formats, resolving/aliasing, is an interesting problem, but until there are actually two popular formats, it is merely a curiosity and academic challenge, thus not a priority.

Interoperability in this context is a red herring. Specs and protocols compete, and eventually there is capitulation to the winner that gets the most support and thus most tools, in the most coding languages, for the most OS's, with the most end users, skin in the game, etc.

Interoperability is not easy even when you cooperate. People use different languages to program in on both the base/native level, and then in implementations at app level, and then syncing over protocol/specs is another issue.

Even LN implementations are not fully interop.

Interoperability just means people using the same thing, but these are all different things (Slashtags, Web5, nostr) despite them solving some overlapping use cases. So what is really needed is some combination of migration, resolvers, aliasing, conversion, support for multiple formats in clients, etc, etc.

You probably won't see much of that at this stage. This is not to say that Synonym is closed-minded or stubborn, so much as all of our teams have to manage our priorities. Synonym has actively researched, contacted, and collaborated as often as possible, but this environment, so far is honestly one of the more hostile and collaboration-disinterested I have encountered. Very competitive.

I personally think managing keys across formats, resolving/aliasing, is an interesting problem, but until there are actually two popular formats, it is merely a curiosity and academic challenge, thus not a priority.

  • Using Slashtags as an oracle with an outside smart contract project
  • Creating a Slashtags runtime so any app can use it without RN
  • Getting LDK to route better in Bitkit

etc, etc, etc

What do you think about the mempoolfullrbf debate?

What do you think should happen next?

It has admittedly grown on me after a few days of intensive usage.

We are definitely breaking it regularly and adding new features. Probably the best time to revisit using Slashtags features will be when we release our mobile wallet.

At that time it will be used in production with some web platforms, including Bitfinex. We are not really soliciting people to go wild using it yet, but if anyone has serious interest in applying it, we will help and we are openly looking for teams to collaborate with.

Certain use cases already work, but we are regularly updating the code as we implement into our wallet and polish the UX.

Things should be much clearer, cooler, and powerful this summer.

Sidechains started as an idea for creating 2-way peg from Bitcoin to an outside new chain. This design was never accomplished and so the "federated" sidechain was born. Unfortunately, in practice this functions very similarly to an altcoin in that the peg is a manual permissioned process enacted by central custodians.

Further, it is not a sound argument to call this a Bitcoin caling layer, as it does not scale itself and it does not deterministically settle to Bitcoin or use Bitcoin transactions to operate.

LBTC is not actually BTC, it is a token controlled by the federation which they currently offer a 1:1 exchange rate when entering and leaving their private network. This could change at any time if they choose.

You have it backwards. More people using Bitcoin for more purposes supports the block rewards in fees. You can't use Bitcoin without paying fees, even if you use it for tokens. Tokens add txns.

If you want to be concerned about fees being taken offchain, why don't you hate Lightning itself?

Yes, I think Bitcoin would not only "survive" your scenario, but thrive in it.

Custodial wallet accounts bring compliance requirements, legal overhead, censorship, etc. The whole point of Bitcoin is to hold it yourself, and the more we respect this, the better the tools we need will evolve.

We need browsers, desktop wallets, and browser extensions that handle these needs, not more accounts.

Stablecoins started on Bitcoin and never left and never had any influence on its code/health or the code of any other blockchain afaik.

Understand that every Bitcoin transaction is an abstraction of unknown value that the traders can ascribe any value to they choose. This is just how BItcoin works, you don't get to decide how people use it, or even know for sure. You are worrying about things that cannot be controlled.

You think a bunch of traders trading Bitcoin on exchanges or BlockFi yield or GBTC is any better?

The real attacks are coming from nocoiners, Big Banks, PoS shitcoins, and people that do not use the Bitcoin blockchain.

If you'd like to learn more about why we think tokens are important, listen to our recent Spaces about it, or my recent interview with Stephan Livera or Lunaticoin.

  1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QflalrGaIvw
  2. https://stephanlivera.com/episode/362/
  3. https://anchor.fm/lunaticoin/episodes/C21-e04---Synonym-and-Lightning-Tether-with-John-Carvalho-e1gbv49

Thanks! Slashtags doesn't collect emails and supports both data feeds from websites, and soon, encrypted messaging. It is up to the website whether to collect emails and associate them with account keys, but we are trying to make sure that isn't needed to communicate. The problem complicates when you consider that people generally like having a second-factor way to auth and change account info when they lose it.

We have discussed it. We will mature it further and reassess in the future. We are also shorthanded when it comes to people with the time and inclination to write specs and prepare this kind of thing, but interest is growing quickly and we keep coming up with new ways to improve Bitcoin and LN, so I think the time will come when we start making BIPs and BOLTs and more...

LN does provide certain privacy benefits, but the culture of the spec attempts to make it a global network with complex routing and thus some privacy is lost. Generally, direct P2P is an optimal privacy model, but once you start routing and sharing route data and listening for requests etc, things get tricky.

LN could and will be better, Synonym actually has some ideas about ways to improve it that we will probably float to the community this year.

Mixing is mostly dumb, I believe privacy is lost not gained, and that creating extra metadata is bad. That said, LN route mixing is interesting, and even more so once we have tokens and multiple assets to swap ;)

Oh I dont know if I have used it enough yet to say, but I will try to answer:

  • It's okay to make the design nicer, I promise.
  • It should use Slashtags and Reputation features more deeply
  • The jobs page should be priced per day, not per minute, and should have a 1 sat minimum bid.
  • it shouldnt be custodial balances
  • it should have more leaderboard features for users and post-types and timeframes, etc

maybe it already does some of these things or these are bad ideas, just riffing!

  1. Generally, most books suck, particularly Bitcoin and tech industry ones. There is only one good Bitcoin book, Cryptoeconomics, and even that one I would debate some aspects of, but at least it is intelligent, rational, and can be applied. Otherwise, books that have influenced me are The Red Queen by Matt Ridley, and metaphysical speeches by people like Alan Watts, Jordan Peterson, etc. The way I tackle a topic is to obsess about it and discard bullshit with extreme prejudice. I went into a very deep rabbit hole for a long time to design Synonym's vision and choices. What's important is to make new mistakes, so you have to make sure to shed old ones and focus on what is left and the dynamics involved. Primitives are all that matter, you can't design without identifying them and knowing where the edges of a system really are.

  2. As I modeled a hyperbitcoinized world I came to the conclusion that there will always be multiple forms of money and the need for finance (using other peoples money to accelerate growth and cooperate on larger goals) and thus you need at least Bitcoin as decentralized abstracted value and "credit" as trusted issuer-defined value. We need tokens as credit and we need them to be as programmable as Bitcoin so we can leverage trust and abstract away the need for government fiat entirely.

  3. I guess it isn't up to me to decide what is the most controversial take, but you could go through my Good Morning tweets and look at the ones with the most replies I guess :) https://twitter.com/i/events/1442133822724841472

Otherwise, I think maybe the most underappreciated take is that Bitcoin is not divisible. I am worried that Bitcoiners both misunderstand that Bitcoin is an enforced integer total, having no decimals, but also misunderstand that dividing and multiplying Bitcoin are the same thing, and that one day we may have to make a hard decision to add more Bitcoins, and it might even be a majority of people that want it and for rational reasons. I am just relieved that I will probably be dead before that debate arises :)

I wish we never had the "Bitcoin" denomination and always used sats only. (and also that we had named them bits or bitcoins instead!)